Rising above mediocrity is secondary to making money, the only way anything really changes is if they stop making money.

This seems to be a common theme, but I'm not certain it's a correct theme.

I'm not privy to all the inside details of the White Sox financial strategy, but I have to believe a higher turnout at the gate would lead to a greater revenue stream, and therefore a higher net. One can't look at this and say, "Reinsdorf is just happy making money." because I can almost guarantee you if there is a lot more money to be made, and he's not getting it, he'll be working his butt off to get it.

I think a fair statement would be "Reinsdorf isn't going to bet the ranch in order to acheive the possibility of larger rewards right now". In other words he's risk averse at this point - which is far different from saying he's satisfied just making some money.

While it seems as though this distinction is splitting hairs, it really isn't. Reinsdorf can add to his bottom line by simply trying to harvest what I think is a huge, untapped reservoir of White Sox fans just by getting a decent marketing team in place. The damning thing about it is he never seems to get around to actually putting a decent marketing program in place. To his defense, Reinsdorf is not a marketing guru - he's a money raising guru, but he's got to get somebody to straighten out the marketing side. Right now the team just appears adrift as to whom they are marketing toward, and what the selling points should be. For all we know the lost upside could be killing Reinsdorf, yet he's incapable of righting the ship.

I realize things are always more complicated than most people realize (myself included), and I can see where the stadium deal may actually trim a lot of incentives out of increasing attendance (e.g. rent kick ins and such) and I don't think he's looking to move the team and cash out that way - I'm not even sure he'd be able to do that with the stadium deal (which still has a ways to run).

It may simply be a case of loyalty overwhelming the common good (my take), or the fact he's simply not the right person to address the issues facing the organization and its fan base right now. I doubt he'll sell with pricing being depressed, so we'll all just have to hope he brings in the right people.

This seems to be a common theme, but I'm not certain it's a correct theme.

I'm not privy to all the inside details of the White Sox financial strategy, but I have to believe a higher turnout at the gate would lead to a greater revenue stream, and therefore a higher net. One can't look at this and say, "Reinsdorf is just happy making money." because I can almost guarantee you if there is a lot more money to be made, and he's not getting it, he'll be working his butt off to get it.

I think a fair statement would be "Reinsdorf isn't going to bet the ranch in order to acheive the possibility of larger rewards right now". In other words he's risk averse at this point - which is far different from saying he's satisfied just making some money.

While it seems as though this distinction is splitting hairs, it really isn't. Reinsdorf can add to his bottom line by simply trying to harvest what I think is a huge, untapped reservoir of White Sox fans just by getting a decent marketing team in place. The damning thing about it is he never seems to get around to actually putting a decent marketing program in place. To his defense, Reinsdorf is not a marketing guru - he's a money raising guru, but he's got to get somebody to straighten out the marketing side. Right now the team just appears adrift as to whom they are marketing toward, and what the selling points should be. For all we know the lost upside could be killing Reinsdorf, yet he's incapable of righting the ship.

I realize things are always more complicated than most people realize (myself included), and I can see where the stadium deal may actually trim a lot of incentives out of increasing attendance (e.g. rent kick ins and such) and I don't think he's looking to move the team and cash out that way - I'm not even sure he'd be able to do that with the stadium deal (which still has a ways to run).

It may simply be a case of loyalty overwhelming the common good (my take), or the fact he's simply not the right person to address the issues facing the organization and its fan base right now. I doubt he'll sell with pricing being depressed, so we'll all just have to hope he brings in the right people.

If value is increasing and profits have been rolling in for years, no need to take chances. He does very well with other peoples money and that is why he is a very rich man. As Ive said before he has the pigs get fat, hogs go to market philosophy, which has worked very well for him.

Reinsdorf can add to his bottom line by simply trying to harvest what I think is a huge, untapped reservoir of White Sox fans just by getting a decent marketing team in place. The damning thing about it is he never seems to get around to actually putting a decent marketing program in place. To his defense, Reinsdorf is not a marketing guru - he's a money raising guru, but he's got to get somebody to straighten out the marketing side.

Would an unreasonable conclusion to the ongoing marketing/attendance struggles is the fact that White Sox fans are impervious to marketing? Marketing or not all they show up for is a fun and or competitive team?

If this organization wants to rise above mediocrity, it needs to stop privileging loyalty over performance among its scouts, coaches and player development people.

Frater, I think this may well be the heart of the Sox problem. Yes, also at fault is an unwillingness to invest more resources in drafting, scouts, etc. But perhaps the biggest problem overall is the loyalty over performance way of running things.

We've seen years of very little talent coming up through the system. Yet, was anyone accountable for these constant failures?

Frater, I think this may well be the heart of the Sox problem. Yes, also at fault is an unwillingness to invest more resources in drafting, scouts, etc. But perhaps the biggest problem overall is the loyalty over performance way of running things.

We've seen years of very little talent coming up through the system. Yet, was anyone accountable for these constant failures?

The thing about this that I have never understood is that it seems very penny-wise and dollar foolish. The more young talent you develop which would cost pennies means the less big dollars you have to pay out to the likes of Peavy, Rios, Dunn, Danks, et al. They're running out a very mediocre roster with a $122 million payroll. I would think that, ideally, the better you are developing young, cheap talent, the lower your payroll would be.

Would an unreasonable conclusion to the ongoing marketing/attendance struggles is the fact that White Sox fans are impervious to marketing? Marketing or not all they show up for is a fun and or competitive team?

Nobody is impervious to marketing.

Isn't a bad day at the ballpark better than a great day at work? Start making the case.

Would an unreasonable conclusion to the ongoing marketing/attendance struggles is the fact that White Sox fans are impervious to marketing? Marketing or not all they show up for is a fun and or competitive team?

The fans they should be targeting are the casual "baseball" fans. The fans that just like to get out 3-4x a year to soak up the 'game day experience.' In other words - the Sox equivalent of typical Cubs fans. It's this group that will fill in the empty 10,000 - 15,000 seats on a Tuesday night in April.

Now the question is - how do you get them? So far, the Sox haven't been able to find a John McDonnough-type to answer that question. I know this much...Brooks Boyer isn't the answer.

The fans they should be targeting are the casual "baseball" fans. The fans that just like to get out 3-4x a year to soak up the 'game day experience.' In other words - the Sox equivalent of typical Cubs fans. It's this group that will fill in the empty 10,000 - 15,000 seats on a Tuesday night in April.

Rising above mediocrity is secondary to making money, the only way anything really changes is if they stop making money.

I don't think that's true at all. It's the sort of smug, convoluted logic all too prevalent among the fanbase that is hurting the franchise.If winning were easy, everyone would do it. It all it took was spending money, the Marlins would have had a great 2012, maybe losing to the Angels in the World Series. There are more big-salary failures in the last 20 years than big-salary champions.

Spending money, more money than anyone else was offering, on Adam Dunn wasn't about profitability above mediocrity. Many who had watched Dunn play believed it was a bad baseball move, but it was something a majority of fans wanted. It isn't even a matter of hindsight. The day Dunn was signed, it was noted in the discussion that you could get as much from Mark Reynolds at a much lower cost because he was available in trade. Now fans complain that the franchise is cheap because it won't eat his contract.

Fans complain that the White Sox traded Daniel Hudson for Edwin Jackson after Jake Peavy went down, although keeping a minor league prospect and his ERA in excess of 6 to continue to perhaps get hammered in the American League would have been far cheaper. Trading for Jake Peavy wasn't cheap. Taking on the Alex Rios contract wasn't cheap. Re-signing Paul konerko wasn't cheap.

The Sox didn't sign any big name free agents this off-season, but I don't think that is a matter of putting profit before rising above mediocrity. More often than not in recent years, signing the big free agents as probed both from the perspective of business and baseball.What fans do by hurting their team's franchise financially is put them in a position where they can once again say the franchise is blaming the fans, blame that really only exists in their convoluted logic.